sm-sorcery AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Discussion of Sorcery related topics
List archive
[SM-Sorcery]Re: [SM-Discuss] glibc 2.2.5 -> 3.2.1 update probs / sorcery save_libraries
- From: Gareth Clay <garethclay AT ntlworld.com>
- To: SM Sorcery mailing list <sm-sorcery AT lists.ibiblio.org>
- Subject: [SM-Sorcery]Re: [SM-Discuss] glibc 2.2.5 -> 3.2.1 update probs / sorcery save_libraries
- Date: Fri, 1 Nov 2002 22:58:05 +0000 (GMT)
It wouldn't be sufficient just to have a rescue cd. Often, in order to
perform a rescue you need to use chroot, which exectutes sh. sh in sorcery
is symlinked to bash which is dynamically compiled, so you're going to
have problems if you're missing some libraries. Believe me, I speak from
bitter experience! It would be great if we could have a small, static
shell like ash for rescue purposes.
Also, as far as glibc goes, is there any way we can make the upgrade /
downgrade process more user-friendly? I tried to downgrade to glibc 2.2.5
a couple of days ago and ended up with missing C libraries all over the
place - big problem (especially when you have no static shell)! Is there a
way to do a safe upgrade / downgrade?
Cheers,
Gareth
-
[SM-Sorcery]Re: [SM-Discuss] glibc 2.2.5 -> 3.2.1 update probs / sorcery save_libraries,
Gareth Clay, 11/01/2002
- Re: [SM-Sorcery]Re: [SM-Discuss] glibc 2.2.5 -> 3.2.1 update probs / sorcery save_libraries, Andrew, 11/01/2002
-
Re: [SM-Sorcery]Re: [SM-Discuss] glibc 2.2.5 -> 3.2.1 update probs / sorcery save_libraries,
Dufflebunk, 11/01/2002
-
Re: [SM-Sorcery]Re: [SM-Discuss] glibc 2.2.5 -> 3.2.1 update probs / sorcery save_libraries,
Gareth Clay, 11/01/2002
-
[SM-Sorcery]X Compile fails,
Marcus Martin, 11/02/2002
- Re: [SM-Sorcery]X Compile fails, Julian v. Bock, 11/02/2002
-
[SM-Sorcery]X Compile fails,
Marcus Martin, 11/02/2002
-
Re: [SM-Sorcery]Re: [SM-Discuss] glibc 2.2.5 -> 3.2.1 update probs / sorcery save_libraries,
Gareth Clay, 11/01/2002
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.